In the UK, there was a (seemingly now defunct) service design effort to support people who were called on to be witnesses in a criminal justice case. Called, Judica, it was run in partnership with the UK Ministry of Justice, with a design team through the Royal Academy of Art in the UK, with team members
In some recent testing of possible online court scenarios (with “Wizard of Oz” prototyping — not really coding these online court scenarios), our research team has observed an interesting trend. Many users will click on a button to ‘Skype with a Judge’ or to ‘Start Online Court’. They are intrigued and a little excited to
After reading and thinking about various participatory design and open innovation strategies, I’ve been brainstorming around how to get more community input into the redesign of the legal system. Could we have a roving laboratory, a pop-up place that would consult with people about what services they want, how they want to get them, and
Jose Fernando Torres, of Universidad Sergio Arboleda in Colombia, spoke at the Legal Design Lab‘s Law + Design Summit last week, and introduced the Hacking 4 A2J design cards. He made them with the design firm Haptica. These cards are guidance and provocations for a team looking to improve the justice system, using an agile
My listening this week: a podcast, Jumping Off the Ivory Tower, from Prof. Julie MacFarlane, of Canada’s National Self Represented Litigant Project. Here’s how Julie presents her vision for the podcast: Jumping Off the Ivory Tower with ProfJulieMac is a weekly podcast of about 30 minutes – perfect commuting time, or time to walk the dog
Lawyer Erica Johnstone sent me a copy of a beautiful, laminated Cheat Sheet for people exploring how they might get a restraining order for online abuse. She produced it with her nonprofit Without My Consent, that focuses on fighting online harassment. This cheat sheet is in part based on Santa Clara Judge Shana Schwarz’s cheat sheets
Today at the Court Technology Conference, I was lucky to co-present with Dan Jackson of NuLaw Lab of Northeastern University, and Christopher Griffin of the A2J Lab at Harvard Law School. Our topic was: what can courts learn from law schools about user experience and innovation? Dan did an excellent job contextualizing this challenge, explaining
Two court leaders, Rob Oyung of the California courts and Casey Kennedy of the Texas courts, spoke at the Court Technology Conference this morning about what some of the myths around “why courts can’t innovate” are–and then talking through how they are figuring out ways to bring innovation into their courtrooms and organizations.
At Court Technology Conference, the panel of Rob Oyung and Casey Kennedy is talking about Missouri court’s efforts to build intuitive online applications for users. Let users customize the view Provide just in time help Build the app to be extendable Use agile methodology, to take small risks and get quick feedback Improve the business
I was lucky enough to attend an IAALS working group for their Court Compass project, on reimagining the future of self-represented litigant experience in family courts. Their research team made a terrific presentation on different trends, models, and studies being done. This is one of my sketches from the session, which captures the essential parts
Yesterday I got a treat in the mail: Stefania Passera’s book all about legal design and contract visualization: Beyond the Wall of Contract Text. She just finished and defended her PhD thesis at Aalto University in Finland. The book encapsulates all of this wonderful research into better ways of conveying knowledge, schemes, and rules. Congratulations
Hat tip to Helena Haapio for sending these on: Two different websites chronicling ways to protect people’s data privacy online. There is Prvacypatterns.org and PrivacyPatterns.EU. Both sites lay out distinct visual and tech strategies to protect people’s privacy from bad actors, or even corporations. Both versions involve a similar group of collaborators. Their goal is
I have been scouting out service design inspirations, particularly from airports, that courts could use. This one is from JFK airport, in the Delta terminal. I was very impressed with their service design. They had taken over an entire gate with a help center that had all kinds of touchpoints: paper, phone terminals, people, kiosks.
For a systems + design thinking workshop that I’m coaching at Stanford d.school this week, I’ve been creating some visuals to help catch participants up with the system of traffic tickets and safety on the streets. I’ve found a stakeholder map to be a very effective and simple way to sum up who’s who in
Earlier this week, I got the chance to talk at the Department of Labor about one of the Legal Design Lab’s recent projects on improving legal communication. I wrote about it over at the Lab’s site — you can see my slides there. Here are my notes from the hearing, where other industry experts and
Professor Camilla Andersen of the University of Western Australia has a sharp presentation on how contract law is broken (or limping along) — particularly in the age of microtransactions online, with a culture of TOS and consumer contracts which no one reads. She proposes ways to think outside the box, pointing to better ways for
In court management circles, it is established that Artificial Intelligence and Big Data are crucial to the evolution of court services. So why isn’t the #AIrevolution taking courts by storm? A few of the dynamics at play: a culture of “no” that resists change, an inertia towards anything tech courts that don’t have control of
Courts aren’t used to thinking about competition. Most have been used to be the only provider of dispute resolution. They haven’t had to think about the public as customers with choice. David Slayton, the court administrator of Texas scourts, presented on court disruption at the National Association for Court Management. If courts can “self-disrupt”, they
At the National Association for court Management, I attended the session on how courts are focused on better engaging minority and disadvantaged communities. There are many dynamics that feed into the poor relationship: Predatory Practices by municipal courts -with bail, fines, fees practices that take money from people in punishing ways Implicit Bias of police
A quick sketch of some of the takeaways from a presentation I gave, along with Karl Branting of MITRE corporation at the National Association for court Management. We spoke on AI and Big Data in the courts, and what the near future could look like with new tech integrated into court processes and services.
Another cartoon from today’s conference for court leaders, amalgamating a few speakers’ points from the lunch’s plenary. I am fascinated by combining the Back stage of court admins’ interests and perspectives, with the Front stage of litigants’ experiences and concerns. We can use more data-gathering about both these stakeholders’ experiences, to improve processes for both–
A drawn dispatch from this week’s National Association for Court Management– from the plenary on how we might use evaluative frameworks to improve how courts perform.
Last week’s New York Times Magazine features a beautiful quote and accompanying exploration of what it means to a person in a bureaucratic building. The original quote from Elif Batuman’s (terrific!) 2017 novel The Idiot observed how going through airport security is like death. You, the person, give your precious things up, and subject yourself
Last week, I spoke at Facebook’s Privacy@Scale one-day conference, on new directions of privacy design in the era of big data and ubiquitous tech. Here are my drawings from the day, with some of the speakers presenting their point of view and agenda. Some of the most interesting takeaways: How can consent in medical situations
Yesterday on NPR’s Sunday morning broadcast, I heard an interview with Alan Alda about his new book and ongoing work to make science comprehensible to normal people. His discussion was completely parallel to work to make the legal system comprehensible. Alda has identified the fundamental problem of communication between experts and lay people, that crosses
Yesterday I spoke at Facebook’s annual Privacy@Scale conference, all about how we can use data ethically and respecting people’s privacy and empowerment. The keynote was from Sandy Pentland, a professor at MIT’s Media Lab, who spoke about his Open Algorithms project — and the mandate he’s setting out for better use of big data for
At recent talks and conferences, I have been welcomed and challenged by people who are explicitly systems-thinkers. Some resist a design approach as too “micro” and lacking computational modeling-that would better predict outcomes rather than testing + experiments. Others see the links between participatory, multi-stakeholder design processes and a systems approach. I am thinking through
Today I am in sunny, lovely Vancouver, British Columbia at a symposium of the Canadian Administrative Tribunals’ adjudicators, advocates, and other professionals. It’s co-hosted by the Council of Canadian Administrative Tribunals and the British Columbia Council of Administrative Tribunals. The theme of the kickoff panel and keynote has been one of keen interest to me:
Earlier this week, I presented my Design for Justice work to a group at the Gruter Institute, with a mix of lawyers, biologists, computer scientists, economists, and more. It was a wonderful force for analogous thinking — because the questions I faced in response to the insights and design work were not the usual questions
During my recent Equal Justice Conference presentation alongside the Harvard Access to Justice Lab, I presented a quick practice visual I made, that would guide people through how they could “Serve Process” in Massachusetts for a guardianship case. These are my first drafts, laying out how I might compose and color a worksheet guide for
I am in Toronto today at Lawyering in the 21st Century day, at Ryerson University with their Legal Innovation Zone. Zev Eigen, Global Director of Data Analytics, presented a keynote on how law firms should be deploying data science in their work.
From this morning’s talk from Berkeley’s Robert A. Kagan on law in the time of disruption, at Stanford. He warns of the shift from the liberal order of the as half century, and the power that “the legal complex” has to stop it and uphold rule of law –particulate against regimes that present themselves as
I took notes at last week’s Equal Justice Conference presentation that I made with the Harvard A2J Lab crew, Erika Rickard, Jim Greiner, and Hallie Jay Pope. These notes capture the presentation that they made, explaining how they decided to take a visual approach to court outreach to litigants facing debt collection. They used visual
While watching CSPAN on Saturday morning (as you do), I came across a rerun of a hearing on airlines’ customer service. (Watch it yourself on C-SPAN’s website, it’s streaming for your convenience). Among the points of pressure that the Senators were putting on the various US airlines’ senior vice presidents at the hearing was one close
Alessandro Carrelli is a PhD researcher at Loughborough Design School, where he is investigating how to bring better user experience and higher quality consent for privacy transactions online. Why is it so hard to communicate to people what is happening with their data, and how can this be done better? He is running workshops and developing
Joshua Lennon lays out an argument for wariness of the coming rise of law chat bots. – they often are not jurisdiction based – they may give people false confidence in quality of the advice – they are too linear and don’t allow people to go back and see how the conditions or answers change
Andrey Zinoviev and Artem Goldman have built a Facebook bot — VisaBot — to help people figure out their eligibility for different immigration paths and then complete forms, letters, and other application matters.
Stanford law student Kevin Xu and his team has made a bot, Hilbert, to help people understand and navigate their health insurance plans. They are focusing on young breastfeeding cancer survivors as a pilot group. They used design thinking to get to a more empathetic and thoughtful experience. Tweet at @askhilbert
Radical– a historian at a Futurist panel! Prof. Norman Spaulding explains the populist roots of legal tools, to drive greater public access to what the law is. Before software, the technology was paper-based, gathering info, details, structures — making it more discoverable and, udeally, usable.